The Sedalia weekly bazoo. [volume] (Sedalia, Mo.) 187?-1904, 1887-08-02

house which she occupied at the time
of the arrest. She gave her name as
Mrs. E. NJ. or NJ. E. Nichols. and
said she was from Boston. 1t was
about the Doth of May last. She
called at various times to pay rent,
always coming alone. He never saw
Richards at the house. Knew defend.
ant had been married-she
told me she was widow
Bridges soto voce "To all intents and
purposes she was" Witness stated
Mrs. Nichols said she had a brother
in Florida with weak lungs whom she
expected to join her soon. She stated
the rent was rather heavy and asked
if he would allow her to sub-rent a
portion of the building. She stated
she expected to 60 into the millinery
business. Never said her husband was
dead. Never corrected statement that
she was a widow.
Cross-examined by Bridges, DR..
SCOTS evidence was not changed.
Mr.. j. w. Bruins was called but
his testimony was not derogatory to
the defendant in anyway. Nothing
about the house or defendant had
impressed him that there was any
thing wrong going on.
Andy Shobe's testimony was brief
and of general character.
+ Jake Shobe was called. His testi-
mony deduced nothing new except
that on the night of the arrest he was
one of the party who made it, and
that while in the house Mrs. Nichols
went up stairs and took some night
clothes, her own, down stairs to
where the lounge was. On being
cross-examined by Bridges, however,
the evidence was broken down, as the
officer was not positive. He also
stated the defendant started to tumble
up the lounge bed in the room
below, when he told her to leave it
alone.
Mr.. Nichols the husband was the
next witness called but Bridges objec.
ting on the grounds that he was not a
competent witness not being allowed
to testify against his wife-he had to
stand aside.
The state here rested its case.
Bridges then asked the court to
discharge the defendant without
any evidence being introduced in de-
tense. He cited from the Missouri
reports the case of the state against
Crowner-similar to the one being
tried. He claimed that the defend
ants were not "openly and habitually
cohabiting" as charged, anb according
to the decision rendered in the case
cited, they could not be adjudged
guilty. JUSTICE Fisher stated that he
wanted to hear the evidenced in defense.
Court here adjourned until 1:15.
At the re-convening the room was
again crowded, and the defense took
up its side.
Hugh Muir was called. Have been
rooming in Colds block for about ten
months.
Mr.. Richards roomed with me in
May some time. Do not know whether
Mrs. Nichols was in town or not.
Have not known her very long. She
came to me and asked if / knew any,
one that wanted a room. Told
her no. Have been at the house
where Mrs. Nichols lives. Was there
twice. Stayed there while Mr.. Rich.
ards went to Versailles on a hunt. |
Slept by myself On a lounge. She
wanted me to stay there because she
was afraid to stay by herself.
He roomed with me while
my brother was out oftown.
Will McNellis testified; | clerk
for Mr.. Muir, know Mrs. Nichols
when / see her. She asked me if /
wanted room and i told
her that l lived at home.
slept with Mr.. Richards one night.
We slept up stairs. Never saw her
until the next morning at the break.
fast table when she was introduced to
me as Mrs. Nichols.
Mr.. Richards was the next witness
put upon the stand by the
defendant and Mr.. Lamm
objected on the grounds that
that a co-defendant could not testify
in behalf of the other defendant. After
argument court ruled that this OBJ
ection held good only in felony and
cases and that this was
neither.
Mr.. Richards testified tina the was
4 boarder at Mrs. Nichols house. He
showed by his books that he had at
divers times paid her money for same.